Does a screenwriter have to be well-read?
Based on my score in this list of 1001 important books, the answer is no.
I got 38.
Some disclaimers are in order. First, the list includes only fiction. If it included non-fiction, I’d score much higher. I only counted books I actually read — seeing the movie doesn’t count. The list makes some questionable choices (The Lord of the Rings trilogy counts as one book, while Alice in Wonderland/Through the Looking Glass is two), and some notable exceptions (Dune, anything by Faulkner1). But there were enough titles that I recognized and hadn’t read to make me feel a bit ashamed.
The list comes from 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die
By all means, share your score and criticisms in comments.
(Original link via Jason Kottke.)
- I mistyped Faulkner’s name when doing a search. Unfortunately, I’d already credited myself for The Sound and the Fury. ↩
97 Responses to “Does a screenwriter have to be well-read?”
Leave a Reply
RSS feed for comments on this article.
Get a Gravatar. They're free and work on lots of different sites.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:32 am
Under 20. Surprised Kafka’s The Metamorphosis wasn’t listed, or Azuela’s Los De Abajo. Hell, Dante isn’t there either, unless I skipped something.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:46 am
No, I suppose a screenwriter doesn’t have to be well read. But I’ve been in town for fifteen years and I’ve never met a great, or even a good screenwriter who isn’t.
Writers read. It’s part of their DNA.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:50 am
Call me a cynic, but I immediately dismiss lists like this as arrogant nonsense. It’s not that I don’t have an appreciation for literature and its transcendence… I do. The power of the novel in particular and writing in general is what made me want to write.
It’s just that I will be the judge of what I should read before I die.
Besides, it doesn’t help that the term “well-read” is a rather loaded one. Instead, I think every writer should read widely — commercial, literary, fiction, non-fiction.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:57 am
I read every day, but I’ve neglected so many classics that I always refuse to take similar quizzes. Although I hate doing things just to fit in, I kick myself for not reading them. Hell, I kick myself for swearing off “literary fiction” because I thought it was pretentious; because of it, I missed out on the tales of writers who are not counted among my favorite.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:58 am
I went through the list at a pretty quick pace but still caught 20 books that I’ve read. I don’t know if I’ve been making bad selections or what, but I expected to be higher, reading books at about 40 - 50 a year over the last three or four years.
What struck me most was that a lot of books that I’ve read that I feel should be on the list, were not listed. Also, I noticed that if a single example of an author’s work was listed, it was likely that their entire catalog was. Does anyone really need to read every Salman Rushdie book (I counted at least seven).
May 13th, 2008 at 9:02 am
63 and I consider myself well-read (thank you, being an English major in college for probably half of the books).
Metamorphosis was at the very bottom, The Inferno was squeezed in there too, somewhere. The best thing to read for a screenwriter is scripts, in my opinion.
I like lists like these, though (same with 1001 movies to see before you die). Even if noteable works are absent from the list, pretty much anything you find on there will be a good read/watch.
May 13th, 2008 at 9:03 am
20 seems like a popular benchmark, as I was at 21.
I’m confused about your mention of Faulkner though. There were quite a few of his books on the list. Are you saying they SHOULDN’T be there?
May 13th, 2008 at 9:10 am
Console yourself with the fact that I got a BIG GOOSE EGG. I didn’t see Jaws so I couldn’t choose one. Though for writers I would moreso suggest film books and authors like Bazin, Deleuze, etc.
Fiction really won’t help a writer as it is a different structure than screenwriting.
May 13th, 2008 at 9:19 am
I got 43. I’m amazed by a) how many were because they were assigned by one particular high school English teacher and b) how many more are books that I actually own and are sitting on a shelf to read “someday.”
May 13th, 2008 at 9:20 am
40 even, but quite of a few of them were “kid” classics that they had us read in school - The Hobbit, Huck Finn, The Little Prince, Little Women.
Most of the books on the list from the last century I don’t even recognize. Doesn’t make me feel guilty but it does make me want to read more. Time to go pay off some hefty library fines.
May 13th, 2008 at 9:24 am
@ Christian
I disagree (and I didn’t score that highly on the list either, somewhere around 15. Then again I read more biographies and non-fiction).
The structure is different, I won’t argue with that. However there are still things you can learn. If you ever want to know how to play a beat to maximum effect read a Stephen King book (also read a SK book if you want to know how to blow an ending with some good ole’ deus ex machina).
Some books don’t lend themselves well to screenwriting because they’re more introspective, whereas screenplays are more visual. There is still something to be learned though. If you want to learn about style read poetry and song lyrics in addition to screenplays. Anything you read can be learned from, although in the vast majority of cases you learn what NOT to do.
May 13th, 2008 at 9:31 am
I only got 13… a little ashamed of course… but honest…
No Cortazar in the list? Only 2 Borges books? No Vargas Llosa or Torcuato Luca de Tena? is the list written by an American? It probably is… of course, there is no Bukowski either… pretty strange…
May 13th, 2008 at 9:33 am
100 for me. An oddball list, that’s for sure. And I’ll second the odd exceptions comment as well.
May 13th, 2008 at 9:38 am
I got 33. Or 43 depending how badly I miscounted.
Surprised Atlas Shrugged isn’t on there.
May 13th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Some of those were short stories. One of them was an essay. I saw so many I’ve been meaning to read. A lot of them are really great books except for Nostromo. I wanted to punch Conrad in the face while I read that book in college.
I mostly cleaned up in the 1800s.
I got 69 in all, but that’s because I got the degrees and teach high school English. I sort of cashed in on all that Poe and Dickens and the Brontes. Still, I was surprised by how many I hadn’t read.
May 13th, 2008 at 10:06 am
I disagree with Christian Howell about fiction not helping a writer. Maybe it doesn’t help him but I doubt I’m the only one that feels like fiction has helped me write.
Good books inspire me to write, and not just to write books. I’m not sure exactly how to make my point, but I think I am basically saying that if you think reading fiction doesn’t help a writer then I think you are dumb.
May 13th, 2008 at 10:07 am
Just 43. And I was a freakin’ English major!
May 13th, 2008 at 10:46 am
Me: 122. My mum I think has read them all bar Stephen King - but she’s not a screenwriter. So the answer is no - but it probably helps…
May 13th, 2008 at 11:01 am
I got 108, but there were so many great novels that were not on this list. I’m pretty sure I nailed every single sf and fantasy novel, which makes me wonder how I would do on a list of 200 or 500 best books from those genres.
I have to believe that reading fiction makes me a better screenwriter, but that is not the same as saying that one has to be well-read to be a good screenwriter. It’s all about baselines and potentials. I may start with so much less talent than John August that he would always be a better screenwriter, even if he had never read any fiction, and even if I had read 100% of the books on this list. All else being equal, however, I imagine the well-read screenwriter has an edge.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:08 am
That 1001 list reminds me of a few I keep meaning to read more of and a few I’m glad no one will ever be able to force me to read again its more of a product of its creator’s bias than a useful list. If you want to write and need a grounding in fantasy, science fiction, thrillers or crime it has huge holes. No Herbert - Dune, No Forsyth - Day of the Jackal, No Lewis - Narnia, No MacLean - Where Eagles Dare, No C.S. Forester, No Le Carre, No Harry Harrison and No Pratchett. It skips the great classics to missing Beowulf, Gilgamesh etc too. Some authors get entry after entry which squeezes others off the list.
Now creating a list of 1001 authors for budding writers to consider reading with suggestions of books, script, plays, short stories, poems and other works might be a useful thing to do. Happily I’m grossly under qualified for that task.
BTW I got 38 too
May 13th, 2008 at 11:08 am
So is this really the exact list from that book? If it is I wonder if they’ll get wind of it and make him take it down. While I’m 100% in support of author’s rights, it seems a bit silly to buy a book just to get a list of 1001 books that some guy thinks everyone else should read.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:17 am
mom’s across the country tell their aspiring screenwriting teenagers that they don’t read enough. they should read your blog.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:33 am
@ Jonathan K:
My mistake on Faulkner. Corrected with a footnote.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:33 am
I think it’s helpful - NOT essential - to be well read in what you write. Writing mostly genre, I’m pretty up to speed on anything from Lovecraft to Ellison, but you could chase me outta the room with Salinger.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:41 am
Personally I think a screenwriter needs to be well WATCHED… err you get me.
I’ve read quite a bit, but I’ve seen more movies than I’m comfortable admitting in public.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:50 am
Just because you can’t necessarily draw a straight line between being well-read and being a good screenwriter doesn’t mean that one isn’t important to the other.
I think you definitely need to be a well-rounded human being to be a good screenwriter. And part of being a well-rounded is being well-read. No way around it. Unless you have a time machine and the freedom to travel the world, there are enormous chunks of the human experience that you’re going to be completely in the dark about. Literature helps fill in those chunks — not completely by any means, but to a large extent.
Someone like Tarantino probably wouldn’t crack the double digits on that test. But I bet Bill Goldman comes in at 500+. One of them does really well with a very specific kind of movie. The other can do a bang-up job at pretty much anything he wants.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:52 am
1001 is hardly a succint list of things you must read before you die, though is it? Now, I love Dickens, but Martin Chuzzlewit is not up there with the best of them. Great if you’ve read a large proportion of the authors on there, because it shows you’re prepared to try different kinds of books, but if you don’t particularly care for, say, Murakami, or Atwood, why read the complete works?
Incidentally, I “scored” 131, but since I’ve read A Dance to the Music of Time, and it’s actually 12 books, I’m going to claim 143.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:53 am
“1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die”
Then I shall stop just one short, thank you very much.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:59 am
37 for me
Surprised there are no William Kennedy books or Carlos Fuentes.
May 13th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Seems to me the list includes a bunch of minor works by major (or not so major) contemporary authors.
A lot of older classics are excluded.
And why does the list contain one children’s book? Kind of puzzling. But all in all I don’t think the list is all that bad.
I counted 90 titles that I’m absolutely sure I’ve read. A lot of the old books (early 20th century and older) I read as a kid and remember only very vaguely — typically about two scenes per book.
From How Green is my Valley (not on the list actually) I remember a horrible and bloody home birth which basically gave me nightmares.
From Ivanhoe I remember two scenes and one of them involves this horrible merchant-Jew character and his beautiful and long-suffering Jewess daughter. He scared me to death.
From All Quiet on the Western Front the most vivid scene I remember involves a ship (warship?) that’s been torpedoed. The shock-wave comes from directly underneath, a lot of men are on the deck and the force is such that their thigh-bones shoot upwards and into the chest-cavity. Afterwards somebody (the main character?) walks from one writhing body to another and shoots the men in the head. Needless to say this scene brought on a minor childhood trauma.
Booklist:
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time – Mark Haddon; Middlesex – Jeffrey Eugenides; The Book of Illusions – Paul Auster; Platform – Michael Houellebecq; Super-Cannes – J.G. Ballard; Elementary Particles – Michel Houellebecq; Glamorama – Bret Easton Ellis ; Trainspotting – Irvine Welsh; Wild Swans – Jung Chang; Get Shorty – Elmore Leonard; London Fields – Martin Amis; The Black Dahlia – James Ellroy; The Bonfire of the Vanities – Tom Wolfe; The Old Devils – Kingsley Amis; Empire of the Sun – J.G. Ballard; The Wasp Factory – Iain Banks; The Unbearable Lightness of Being – Milan Kundera; Neuromancer – William Gibson; Delta of Venus – Anaïs Nin; Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas – Hunter S. Thompson; Slaughterhouse-five – Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.; Portnoy’s Complaint – Philip Roth; Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? – Philip K. Dick; One Hundred Years of Solitude - Gabriel GarcÃa Márquez; The Master and Margarita – Mikhail Bulgakov; In Cold Blood – Truman Capote; One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich – Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn; The Golden Notebook – Doris Lessing; A Severed Head – Iris Murdoch; Naked Lunch – William Burroughs; The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle – Haruki Murakami; The Leopard – Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa; The Bell – Iris Murdoch; Homo Faber – Max Frisch; Doctor Zhivago – Boris Pasternak; The Talented Mr. Ripley – Patricia Highsmith; Lolita – Vladimir Nabokov; The Long Goodbye – Raymond Chandler; The Old Man and the Sea – Ernest Hemingway; The Rebel – Albert Camus; The End of the Affair – Graham Greene; The Grass is Singing – Doris Lessing; Nineteen Eighty-Four – George Orwell; Under the Volcano – Malcolm Lowry; The Plague – Albert Camus; Animal Farm – George Orwell; Christ Stopped at Eboli – Carlo Levi; The Little Prince – Antoine de Saint-Exupéry; The Grapes of Wrath – John Steinbeck; Brighton Rock – Graham Greene; Of Mice and Men – John Steinbeck; Gone With the Wind – Margaret Mitchell; Independent People – Halldór Laxness; Auto-da-Fé – Elias Canetti; The Postman Always Rings Twice – James M. Cain; Miss Lonelyhearts – Nathanael West; The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas – Gertrude Stein; Brave New World – Aldous Huxley; Cold Comfort Farm – Stella Gibbons; The Thin Man – Dashiell Hammett; The Glass Key – Dashiell Hammett; Vile Bodies – Evelyn Waugh; All Quiet on the Western Front – Erich Maria Remarque; Lady Chatterley’s Lover – D.H. Lawrence; The Good Soldier Å vejk – Jaroslav HaÅ¡ek; The Murder of Roger Ackroyd – Agatha Christie; The Great Gatsby – F. Scott Fitzgerald; Main Street – Sinclair Lewis; A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man – James Joyce; Mother – Maxim Gorky; The Hound of the Baskervilles – Sir Arthur Conan Doyle; Jude the Obscure – Thomas Hardy; Tess of the D’Urbervilles – Thomas Hardy; The Picture of Dorian Gray – Oscar Wilde; The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn – Mark Twain; The Death of Ivan Ilyich – Leo Tolstoy; Nana – Émile Zola; The Red Room – August Strindberg; Anna Karenina – Leo Tolstoy; Middlemarch – George Eliot; Alice in Wonderland – Lewis Carroll; David Copperfield – Charles Dickens; Wuthering Heights – Emily Brontë; Jane Eyre – Charlotte Brontë; The Count of Monte-Cristo – Alexandre Dumas; Oliver Twist – Charles Dickens; The Red and the Black – Stendhal; The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner – James Hogg; Ivanhoe – Sir Walter Scott; Mansfield Park – Jane Austen; Pride and Prejudice – Jane Austen; Justine – Marquis de Sade; The 120 Days of Sodom – Marquis de Sade; The Sorrows of Young Werther – Johann Wolfgang von Goethe; Fanny Hill – John Cleland; Gulliver’s Travels – Jonathan Swift; The Thousand and One Nights – Anonymous; Aesop’s Fables – Aesopus
May 13th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
I don’t think the number means that much–if you wanted to run up your score quickly, you could tear through the four Hammett novels, or the four by Jeanette Winterson, and stay the hell away from Remembrance of Things Past or Finnegan’s Wake, either of which you could spend a lifetime on.
There were a lot of titles I’d never heard of, though, that’s for sure.
May 13th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
There simply is wayyyyy too much media to soak up. Don’t forget the 1001 songs you must hear, 1001 movies you must see, 1001 paintings you must see, 1001 plays you must see, 1001 episodes of TV shows, 1001 animated works, 1001 words you must use…
May 13th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
20.
and some I never finished (about 15).
I really need to buy some newer books!
May 13th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
86 for me. Apparently my decision to specialize in contemporary British literature paid off –I cleaned up in the 2000s (thank you Ian McEwan, J.G. Ballard, and Kazuo Ishiguro!). But in my opinion, this list can’t define whether you are “well-read� or not – each list is different. My list would include many of these works, but also the Bible, Origin of the Species, etc.
@ Christian – Fiction might have a different structure than screenplays, but a lot of these writers (and many, many others not listed) are masterful at story. The tightest structure in the world won’t make a screenplay if there isn’t a worthwhile story clinging to it (ditto for the reverse). So in that sense, I think that time spent reading story – whether you’re reading fiction, poetry, newspapers, nonfiction, screenplays, drama, whatever – is time well-spent. As long as it doesn’t keep you from writing, too.
May 13th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
@Nick I think you’ve just proven that it comes down to what you intend to do as a writer. Tarantino is probably not interested in doing what Goldman does or vice versa. So it really has very little to do with being well-read. Tastes aside — they’re both great screenwriters.
I’m not arguing against reading (because I dig words), but I am acknowledging that you don’t have to be an avid reader of books to write good movies.
Though it can never hurt. That much I agree with.
May 13th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Of course any list like this is subject to the author’s own tastes and perceptions, but with every one of these 101 or 1001 lists, I always find a few that I remember meaning to read and then do so, usually thankful that I did (the unabridged ‘Count of Monte Cristo, at 1200+ pgs, is one of the most immensely satisfying books I’ve ever read.).
The “Before You Die” approach does seem to me to take out the main reason for reading any of these, or any other, novel (non-fiction, comic, short story, etc) - for the simple, yet deeply pleasurable and satisfying feeling of getting caught up in a great story. The. Fuckin’. Joy. Of. Reading!
May 13th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
I somehow think that it’d be more important for a screenwriter to worry about the movies and shows they’ve watched and the scripts they’ve read.
May 13th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
In my opinion, a screenwriter doesn’t need to be well-read, but he does need to be connected to lists of good reads. For example, Simply Charlotte Mason, Sonlight, Beautiful Feet Books, Veritas Press… and he has to be proficient at linking things together. In the age of the internet, we can all be smart together!
May 13th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
I went to business school, so I only had 9 on the list.
I read all the time, but I do tend to migrate toward non-fiction or a bunch of modern stuff that didn’t make the list (like right now, I’ve been reading that Michael Chabon “The Yiddish Policeman’s Union” book)
May 13th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Managed 45, but close to half were read only because of college requirements.
Anybody can’t remember if they read the book or saw the movie (Out of Africa, and others)?
May 13th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
Sorry, Anna but the scene your describing isn’t All Quiet on the Western Front. I’m not sure what it’s from, but unless it’s somebody telling a story about it as part of a conversation that takes place in the book, that’s not in there.
The most vivid scene that always sticks with me from that novel is the scene where the horses are shot up and trip over their own intestines while screaming.
May 13th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
I got 160. Weirdly, there are fair number of books that I can’t remember if I read or not. But yeah, the list is totally ridiculous. I guess any such list would be. But, The Third Man and The Threepenny Novel?? You’d be better off skipping the novelizations and seeing the movie and the play, respectively… But don’t get me started.
May 13th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
Well, for someone who reads primarily fantasy novels and/or things that I can read before I fall asleep (though I am a pretty voracious reader), my score’s not as bad as I thought it would be– 28.
Mind you, most of those books I’ve read in high school. It did give me two suggestions– the two Douglas Adams I haven’t read.
Evidently, however, I specialize in early-1900s literature, because I had almost all of those novels read. (Yes, I have read both “Vanity Fair” and “The Three Musketeers.” For fun. And I’m not that old.)
May 13th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
56, about half of which I would have read by the age of 12. There were at least another dozen I’d started but never finished (I never could stomach Conrad, either, @emily blake). Notable omissions: Jaws, Life On The Mississippi, anything by Ira Levin or John D. Macdonald.
Does a screenwriter have to be well-read? I think so, yes. Does that meaning reading all the books on this list? Hell, no! It means reading widely — far wider than this list, which excludes non-fiction, short stories, essays, comics, plays, SCREENPLAYS — and it means reading deeply, by which I mean immersing yourself in a writer’s work until you begin to understand how how they pull off their magic act — where the invisible wires are and what the left hand is doing while you’re watching the right.
The august author of this site (sorry, couldn’t resist) once wrote that he had never seen Badlands, but had watched every episode of Bewitched, and that that was just as valid. Well, I may not have read Finnegan’s Wake, but I’ve read pretty much everything ever published by Elmore Leonard, including his Westerns, and I think that’s just as valid. Not to mention the 500+ screenplays I’ve read and the, oh, 5000 or so movies I’ve watched.
Besides which, there are two other vital tasks a writer has besides reading; namely, living and writing.
PS. @Dave, I thoroughly agree with you about Stephen King’s ability to “play the beats”. In Gerald’s Game, for instance, we get an entire chapter consisting of a woman reaching for a glass of water — and it’s absolutely riveting!
May 13th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Ah, the benefits of being an English major! I came up with 66–but I’m not quite sure I actually read some of them (they sound like I would have read them but I can’t be sure…), so let’s call it an even 60.
It would be a much bigger number if I could count SEEING the movie rather than reading the book, but I guess that’s not the point.
May 13th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
I have read 56 from the list. There are so many great books and so little time!
May 13th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
I’m sorry to say that I’ve read more than 280 books on this list. I’m the product of a bad education, aka dual MAs in American Studies/American Literature (with a minor in World Lit)…nearly totally useless unless you’re going after a PhD–which, of course, I wasn’t.
Oh, and some of those “books” on the list are actually short stories–”The Yellow Paper” by Charlotte Perkins Gilman comes to mind as one short story example…
May 13th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
I got 140 even. You don’t have to be well-read to be a screenwriter, but it sure doesn’t hurt.
I was teaching “North by Northwest” to film students at Columbia and I pointed out that the title came from “Hamlet”. Later in the same class, I pointed out a scene where Cary Grant, in order to save his country, had to pretend to be driven mad with love for Eve Marie Saint, but finds that he isn’t really pretending as much as he thinks he is. I asked them who else found himself in a similar predicament.
Crickets.
None of them had read “Hamlet”.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
23, and “The Count of Monte Cristo” is my all time favorite, for James, comment 36.
Did anyone else have those little paperback classic fiction collections as a child? They were illustrated, and the language was updated for younger folks.
That’s how I read most of these books for the first time…illustrated, kiddie versions, and I thank my mom all the time for getting the collection for me.
While my friends were reading “The Babysitter’s Club” and “Sweet Valley,” I was lost in Choose Your Own Adventures and brilliant fiction.
I win.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
I have a problem with lists like this - it turns reading great books, or whatever the list is of, into a chore.
May 13th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
To be honest that’s a pretty crappy list. You wouldn’t be well read if you followed that list, you’d be trendy. A different thing.
May 13th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
My magic number is 18. And to think I considered myself a well-read mug at one time! Of course, I should stop reading books like David Foster Wallace’s INFINITE JEST and the works of Tad Williams… more time for the classics.
I notice a great deal of people are equating being well-read to their prowess in executing a decent screenplay. For my purposes, the books I’ve taken in from the rain and made a home for on my shelves and in my heart and soul affect what I do in LIFE, not so much in my work and/or art. I’m sure these volumes have an impact on our little 120 page visual blueprints but I’m also sure that it’s not for us, as writers, to know what that might be.
Well, back to my Nora Roberts and Dean Koontz…. ooops! Did I say that out loud?
EXPOSED!
May 13th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
I got 20. I would be upset about that, except for the fact that the list is disappointing anyway.
No epic poetry? No Homer? No Virgil? No Dante? No Milton?
No works of philosophy? No Kant? No Plato? No St. Augustine?
No religious texts? No Dhammapada? No Book of Chuang Tzu? No Quran?
No plays? No Shakespeare? No No Exit? No Waiting for Godot? No Sabrina?
And of course no political or historical nonfiction, etc.
For those of us who scored low, I think this might speak more to a (relative) disinterest in novels than to a lack of prolificity as readers.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
It’s not how many books you read, it’s what you take away from them. For me, books give me the knowledge to strengthen my arguments verbally and orally. I had a bad education, I’m playing catch-up. Everyday I wake up and feel stupid - that’s tough to deal with.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Wheee! I got… um… 13. And if it wasn’t for Mr. Vonnegut’s work, that number would be even LOWER!
There were a ton of titles that I’d seen as movies (almost all the Stephen King stuff that’s made it to the screen), and more than a few that I’ve read parts of but not finished (The Last of the Mohicans, for example). For some reason I was astonished that Watership Down wasn’t on there.
And Watchmen is certainly great, but it isn’t the only comic ever written that’s worth reading. Nothing from Miller or Millar? Bendis? Nothing else from Moore? Heck, how about some Carl Barks even? Or are his stories disqualified just because they’re Disney?
May 14th, 2008 at 1:13 am
I agree with the above commenters that there are some glaring omissions. Boccacio? Alice McDermott? Robertson Davies? And there were so many authors who had multiple titles that it would seem better to do a list of authors. There were many authors whose work I had read, but not these particular titles. The one positive about this list is that it wasn’t as anglo-centric as some I’ve seen. The creator seemed to strive for inclusion of “world lit” and women. Interesting little exercise; though like other commenters, I tend not to give too much creedence to what other people think one must read in order to be “well-read”.
May 14th, 2008 at 1:14 am
I’ve read 76 (I’m an early childhood librarian; if I worked in the secondary school, the number might be higher.)
I agree with the above commenters that there are some glaring omissions. Boccacio? Alice McDermott? Robertson Davies? And there were so many authors who had multiple titles that it would seem better to do a list of authors. There were many authors whose work I had read, but not these particular titles. The one positive about this list is that it wasn’t as anglo-centric as some I’ve seen. The creator seemed to strive for inclusion of “world lit” and women. Interesting little exercise; though like other commenters, I tend not to give too much creedence to what other people think one must read in order to be “well-read”.
May 14th, 2008 at 2:08 am
Hi Emily –
You’re right, now that I think about it. The scene in question is probably from The Cruel Sea (set in WWII) by Nicholas Monsarrat. I haven’t read All Quiet on the Western Front, I would have remembered the horses’ intestines for sure.
What I was going to say in my post, but somehow forgot, is that I read a lot of books when I was too young and too unworldly to make a distinction between “worthy” literature and trash novels (not that there were any trash novels on offer at my house). I simply read for thrills.
May 14th, 2008 at 2:53 am
7, and you know what I couldn’t care less, my taste was not represented on that chart. I guess I read too many Nelson DeMille books. I quit books just as quickly as I quit movies, so there were a few more that I started but couldn’t finish but b’ah … looks like I am an uncouth plebeian then.
May 14th, 2008 at 2:58 am
By the way, I think being well-traveled is better than being read, and thankfully I am. Hope for me yet.
May 14th, 2008 at 6:16 am
In my internet search a few months back when I was trying to find this list and the 1001 movies list, I came across a spreadsheet that someone had created that calculates your score. (And also tells you how many books/year you should read in order to get the whole “before you die” thing going.)
I also scored a 38. And with a membership on BookMooch.com, I’ve thus far acquired another 8 from the list that are hanging out in my “to be read” pile. A pile which has about 100 books in it total, so 92% of that pile doesn’t come anywhere near the 1001 list.
I don’t know if it can account for all of the titles left off the list, but I believe the 1001 titles that were chosen for the list were chosen to illustrate the development of the novel (hence the lack of plays, for example). I don’t think it’s intended to be an exhaustive list by any means.
May 14th, 2008 at 6:29 am
I do think that most writers have to be well-read and certainly most screenwriters should also be versed in movies. But I don’t think you can determine that someone is well-read by handing an arbitrary list of books. That’s just imposing one person’s (or committee’s) opinion on everyone else. That smacks of a passion for feeling smug rather than a passion for reading, imo. I admit that I do have a bias toward people who want to write but don’t read. It’s not just about self-expression, it’s about joining a community of living and dead writers and directors. I know that sounds high-falutin’ but I do think that in order to master something, you have to be grounded in the basics of that art or practice.
May 14th, 2008 at 6:31 am
Correction: Instead of
“I admit that I do have a bias toward people who want to write but don’t read.”
I meant:
“I admit that I do have a bias AGAINST people who want to write but don’t read.”
May 14th, 2008 at 7:24 am
May 14th, 2008 at 8:20 am
I’ve got 31, and I thought I was pretty well read. I was very happy to print out the list though, because I have come to the point where I go to my local library and stare at the shelves wondering where to start. There’s so great suggestions.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:21 am
Crap, must proofread. How about There’s SOME great suggestions.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:03 am
Interesting. I got 96 and I majored in public policy and then went to law school, whereas our resident English major, Nick, got 43. Which just goes to show you… This list is just some guy’s personal opinion since Nick has clearly read more than 43 books that his professors thought were must reads (not to mention what he must have read in AP English).
Many fine works are omitted. Many mediocre or downright bad books are included. Some (Absalam, Absalam, Portrait of the Artist As A Young Man) should only be read only under the close supervision of an A.P. English teacher (just kidding, but it wouldn’t hurt). But seriously, I’m just taking this as a list of books that I might want to check out. And when Classics month roles around in my book club, I’ll be able to make a few suggestions. His knowledge of contemporary fiction seems limited (see above reference to many fine books being omitted) and some of his contemporary and classics suggests seem to be based on the “general opinion” that these books are great (or at least that’s my opinion, having read some of them and found them wanting, despite their enormous reputations).
As for whether a screenwriter needs to be well-read, well that’s a little bit like asking whether you really need to read these 1,001 books before you die. It may be necessary for some and not for others. Naturally, as with anything, there is no one size fits all.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:08 am
Okay, I couldn’t resist. Went to Amazon. There’s also 1,001 Movies You Must See Before You Die, 1,001 Albums You Must Hear…, 1,001 Paintings You Must See…, 1,001 Places You Must See…, 1,001 Gardens You Must See… (not kidding), and ad infinitum…
Time to get back to the writing (or Time to make the donuts. Not sure which.)
Btw, for those too young to remember, that was a reference to an old Dunkin Donuts commercial. I’d say a screenwriter should definitely know about that. And thank goodness Amazon has a book for that too. It’s called “An Incomplete Education: 3,684 Things You Should Have Learned but Probably Didn’t.”
May 14th, 2008 at 9:31 am
To Kevin Lehane above, I agree, with a slight modification: being well-read is probably about equally important to being well traveled (in my opinion). Besides the obvious differences between the two (i.e. one is imaginitive while the other is experiential, etc.) the advantage reading a book has over travel is that you can travel through time and see what places looked like in the past, how people talked/behaved in past centuries, and how people thought about all of this. And anyway, if reading became obsolete my liberal arts degree would become a tragic waste of time. I should make a “1,001 Cartoons to Read Before You Die” section of my blog.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:23 am
Having gone through the list more methodically for the benefit of my Dad who scored 128, I actually scored — if we’re taking scores — 19. Not much better, but a whole hell of lot better than 7, so I am slightly less shamefaced. Still, I read way too much pot-boilers, comedies and thrillers (and a hell of lot of screenplays) so … yeah.
I agree with you, though, Madrugada.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:47 am
@Dave and Jacob, You don’t have to agree with me, that’s my opinion. As I said, I read nne of those books cause I’m not a reader. I have read Bazin, Bergson and Deleuze theories and that seems to be worth much more.
But I’m not saying you can’t “learn” anything but it won’t be a direct help as novels allow for long descriptions and more “cerebral” happenings.
I believe studying the Neo-Realists will get you much farther.
May 14th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
@MJBUtah If you haven’t read Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell, that is my top recommendation. It might be a bit of a push through the first section, but the deterioration and build up of language through the book is amazing! I <3 David Mitchell. And a few of his characters are recurring throughout his books which always makes it fun.
And if someone could please delete my glitch of a comment (number 56), I would so much appreciate it! Not quite sure what happened, but I am mortified.
May 14th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
@Paula Puryear:
Yeah, I would conservatively estimate that approximately 100% of my 43 books were assigned reading in high school or college English courses.
I’d have a lot more if I hadn’t burned out on literature by the end of sophomore year and started taking film classes to fulfill the rest of my major requirements…
May 14th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
I’ve read 49 and 1/2 (I’m currently in the middle of Dr. Jekyll). I was also an English major, so there are a number of titles that I started but didn’t finish (I don’t know about my fellow English majors, but I found it damn near impossible to complete all my reading assignments on time, and often had to resort to Cliff Notes or MasterPlots to get up to speed — One of the hazards of taking 2 or 3 English classes at once).
While I didn’t expect anything by somewhat guilty pleasures such as Max Shulman, I’m surprised there was no John O’Hara (at least Appointment in Samarra). A Ring Lardner collection would have been nice. Was pleased that Zeno’s Conscience (aka Confessions of Zeno) made the list.
Since taking up screenwriting, I’ve definitely made less time for fiction (possibly some English major burnout at play, too). I think I got a goose egg for the 2000s list, and maybe 3 for the 1990s (thanks, Watchmen!).
May 14th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
I got plus 70. I was an English major but interestingly enough, many of the more obscure titles from this list I read because of a class I took toward my major called “Queer Theory.” This was the best class I took in college and the course was a perfect mix of literature and film studies–the professor had PHDs in both literature and film studies (I believe). It was this class where I read (for the first and only time simply because of comprehensibility issues) Jacques Derrida, Marquis de Sade, Djuna Barnes. This was also my first exposure to independent films (we’re talking mid-90’s here) like Heavenly Creatures, Celluloid Closet, Jeffrey and many others I can’t recall right now.
“Queer Theory” was taught at the University of Utah and apparently administrators there were nervous about the class and sent “spies” to ensure the Prof. wasn’t teaching students how to be teh ghey.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:52 am
Hey,
Don’t know if you’re still on this thread Rob From Denver, but I think the whole point of the list is to be so long that it defies any claims of being definitive…that’s what that little extra ‘1′ is a nod to: this is A list, not THE list. It actually originated as a coffee-table book, and it’s a good one. The list is light on genre fiction classics and British writers are disproportionately represented but it’s a fun list, if considered for-entertainment-purposes-only.
I scored 187. And I think I can safely say that as much as I enjoyed reading those books, they’ve been very little help with my screenwriting. When I’m working on something, I’m much more likely to reach back to movies or TV shows I saw as a kid, or to comic books or Stephen King novels, than to most of the books on that list.
May 15th, 2008 at 9:22 am
@Nick
Interesting that you got burned out on literature. That actually cures me of my habit of wishing I’d majored in English. Maybe life, any life, is enough experience for anyone to write. If reading helps, great, but as John’s stellar career clearly indicates, reading these books, at least, is not essential. Note to self: Read less, write more.
May 15th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Twenty-Four. Guys, this list is highly suspect. How is “Beloved” the one Toni Morrison book you should read, if you’re only going to read one? There’s a lot of funny little things like that that make me think this list was put together by people who didn’t actually read the books themselves…
Doesn’t that hurt the credibility just a smidge?
“Somebody give me a book by Robert Heinlein.”
“War of the Worlds.”
“I think that’s some other guy, but put that on there.”
“Stranger in a Strange Land.”
“Ooh! I’ve heard of that! Thank you!”
Come on!
May 15th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
As some afterthoughts, my literary reading definitely informs my sense of character, theme, and mood. No question.
As someone who studied theater in college, a list like this feels hollow. Where’s the plays?
May 16th, 2008 at 8:18 am
I think it’s important to read and write at the same time. An author I admire once said “Reading is writing”. Reading for content is important, but for me reading to understand various authors’ styles is invaluable. In my opinion reading helps one find their voice if they’re open to trying to take the best parts of other author’s styles and create their own style out of it. Maybe this is obvious, but it only came to me after years of reading literature/screenplays. http://spinachflame.wordpress.com/
May 16th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
I got bored and quit counting at fifty.
Given the number of multiple entries by some authors, I have some major critiques (beyond agreeing with what John mentioned):
There is only one book by Mark Twain on the list. I suppose it’s because some of his best works are essays, but he did have more than one novel and they’re all good.
The only book by Philip K. Dick is Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. Blade Runner was one of the greatest films of all time (in my book), but the book itself is not actually Dick’s best. There are many Dick novels to choose from, and in my mind Dick deserved more than one entry compared to pretty much any other author.
Chuck Palahniuk, Stanislaw Lem, Arthur C. Clarke, and Gore Vidal also have only one entry each. (And in the case of Lem and Clarke, it is for their most famous books, but not necessarily their best.)
Nothing by: Czesław Miłosz, Charles Bukowski, Manuel Puig, Naguib Mahfouz, Cormack McCarthy, etc.
Many top notch sci-fi and fantasy authors are also missing: Ray Bradbury, the brothers Strugatsky, Neil Gaiman, Phillip Jose Farmer, Vernor Vinge, Alfred Bester, David Brin, Ursula K. LeGuin, Orson Scott Card, Frederik Pohl, Samuel R. Delaney, etc.
It is also uneven in its selections of collections of short stories (Aesop is in, not Bros. Grimm, O’Henry, etc.) and narrative poetry (Ovid but no Beowulf, Illiad & Oddyssey, etc.).
May 18th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Like everyone else, I have a lot of qualms about this list. Off the top of my head I could swap out a hundred books for others.
Scored 191. I used to read a lot before I started writing seriously.
I would not say you have to be well read to be a good writer, but it helps a lot.
May 18th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
I think I’ll ride into the defense of Conrad, if only for his first work. ‘Through Western Eyes’ is a great book, or at least it’s great in my mind.
And those of you who haven’t, I highly suggest reading Bulgakov’s ‘The Master and Margarita,’ preferably the Burgess and O’Connor translation.
May 18th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Huh, that’s a formatting error in my last one. I typed “41.” and then the paragraph about Pushkin. And it block quoted me. Annoying.
May 19th, 2008 at 12:52 am
Oh, also. Where was Michael Chabon?
Surely he’s as well-respected as Zadie Smith, no?
May 19th, 2008 at 8:16 am
Great list but think it clearly shows how writing (and reading)can be such a subjective thing! I cracked the wine open as I began to go through the list yesterday to take the sting off my shame so I might have missed it but I didn’t see ANYTHING by Cheever on the list?
Anyway, I came in at 31 and will be going to the library this morning to pay all my overdue notices so they will allow me to start checking out material again!
May 20th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
You are what you read. Reading informs every sentence you write, every word choice you make. Every time you write, your reading shows.
Does a writer, any writer, screenwriter, playwright, poet or novelist, need to be well read? Not necessarily. A writer best serves his craft by writing, but any time spent reading (think of it as studying)is also time well spent.
May 20th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
And to think there was a time I considered myself a bibliophile!! I’m slightly consoled that a score over 100 seems to be rare–and usually held by those with English degrees and teaching certificates–going by the comments here. And that there are heaps of books on my shelf that didn’t make the list.
Still, I’m with the contingent steeling themselves to pay off library fees. I’m embarassed by the number of titles that made me say, “Well, gee, I always meant to read that….”
May 20th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Uh… that was weird. Apparently the comments section thought my score was so embarrassing that it deleted it for me and instead bolded my first sentence. Thanks, comments. I think.
For the record, I was trying to say that I scored 39. Let’s see if it lets it through this time.
May 20th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
I’m with Rob in Denver, too. I read whatever comes to hand. Some of it I put right back down again unfinished, but most of it is interesting. You never know what will inspire your next plot point/character/setting.
Really great books — and I don’t mean just those on this list — put you deep into another place and time, or inside another person’s head. This allow you to “walk a mile in their shoes”. Of course, you also get that same effect from great works of non-fiction. Into Thin Air puts you right in the middle of a desperate expedition climbing Mount Everest and The Endurance: Shackleton’s Legendary Antarctic Expedition puts you right in the middle of a desperate expedition to the south pole. Both of these are not only great adventure stories, but also are studies on leadership under adverse conditions. It seems to me that if you’re interested in STORYTELLING, which after all, is what a screenwriter does, then you should be interested in STORIES. And it shouldn’t matter that these stories are written on a page, or that they play out on a screen in front of you. Either way, it’s the story and what you get from that story that counts. I find that it’s the telling and the re-telling of these stories that inspires me in my writing - whether it’s by sparking an idea in my head, or by spurring me to see if I can’t do something similar.
Of course, the (almost) surprising thing about this list is how many of these works have been made into movies, miniseries, or television shows. But then, that just proves the point about how central STORY is to movie making.
I agree with most who commented about being surprised by how many separate works by authors were cited. If all 12 books of A Dance To The Music of Time counted as one, and all seven volumes of Remembrance of Things Past count as one, why would Hemingway, Faulkner, or Dickens, or even Austen get separate listings for each of their major works? If this list purports to show the development of the novel, then what differentiates each separate listing of Hemingway’s works to show how novels have developed? Or each citing of Dickens’ novels, or Austen’s? Or more to the point, why does each Dirk Gently book by Adams get a separate listing — they’re both very similar, and it could fairly be said that one is a continuation of the other. Or the three separate citations for Raymond Chandler — all three of which feature the same protagonist. All of these are great books that I can heartily recommend for reading, but it’s not clear to me that each of them need a separating listing. It would be fairer to simply say read anything by Raymond Chandler, anything by Douglas Adams, anything by Dashiell Hammett, anything by Jane Austen, anything by any of the Brontes, and so on.
Other puzzling things:
Like someone else mentioned above, I’m surprised that there’s no Ring Lardner on the list. There isn’t anyone who has done a better job of writing dialog in the American vernacular.
Also surprising is to see nothing listed by Patrick O’Brian, an author who A) is incomparable for putting the reader smack into another world and another time, B) masterfully handles an enormous cast of characters, and C) is that rare male author who creates believable female characters. Oh, and let’s not forget, he’s adept at writing gripping stories. I mean, if Kidnapped, The Three Musketeers and The Count of Monte Cristo makes the list, then why not Master and Commander?
Surely Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas isn’t a novel? (I haven’t read it, but it seems to me that it’s about a personal journey.) And I have read The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test, and in as much as it describes real people and real events, I don’t see how it could be called a novel. Dispatches isn’t a novel, either, but a book about the author’s experiences as a war correspondent. Maya Angelou’s I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings is an autobiography. But then again, the premise here in these comments is that IT’S THE STORY, STUPID, so by that criteria these books do belong. (Two of these were made into movies, and one of these was used as premises for two movies and a TV show.)
On the other hand, if this is about the development of the novel (and not, as we’re discussing, about STORYTELLING), then why isn’t Mallory’s King Arthur on this list? This was one of the first books published by William Caxton, making it the forerunner to all mass produced novels (at least in the English speaking world!) Or Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales?
May 20th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
I got 28, with at least 10 extra that I began but never finished due to disinterest.
I recently read Steinbeck’s “Cannery Row” for the first time and noticed a big influence on Frank Miller’s writing (of “300″ and “Sin City” fame). I also could see a parallel between Steinbeck’s structure — short stand-alone vignette chapters followed by a running ‘mythology’ chapter that continues a narrative thread — and modern serial dramas like The X-Files or Lost. Ya know? Anyone?
May 20th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Of course, I was a bookworm and a nerd, so the the “classic” stuff was easy.
Wish I was better off in the modern era.
May 21st, 2008 at 12:38 am
Ok 248, but I think it’s far from a good list. I have a real problem with reading novels that are “important” in some context (further establishes the novel form or some such), but not actually all that entertaining to read, and I’ll stick with them to the end, mostly. This, I think, helped me most of all, along with an affection for Conrad, Austen, Greene, Dickens, Wolfe and, oddly enough (on this list), Iain Banks.
I am a philosophy undergrad, law degree and now I am a financial analyst - make of that what you will.
To be honest, I again think this isn’t that good a list, as the way to “score high” is to have read the whole oeuvre of the top writers on it. Greene will score you like, 8, and Dickens the same. If you happen to like Calvino, well there’s another 5. Pynchon 5 etc. I really don’t think you need to have read everything Evelyn Waugh, or VS Naipaul wrote to be well read. Something from each will do, more if you like it.
Also, there’s a problem with weighting. Does anyone really think Middlesex is the equal of Middlemarch? I’ve read both, and I’m fairly confident I can predict which one people will be talking about in another hundred years.
@Grapeshot - Excellent point about certain books not being novels. Kesey, Angelou etc. Keysey did write novels. And if you’re going to put in adventure books, why not OBrien indeed, or why not Lonesome Dove? It’s surely as adventurous as Master of Ballentrae. Also, no Robertson Davies? Not one? And yes, all the Phillip Marlowe stories as one, and not all Ellroy? Or the 3 Neuromancer books, not just one? Is Count Zero really inferior to Douglas Adam’s Dirk Gently? And do any of them, beyond Neuromancer, maybe, belong on a 1000 best list? I mean, if someone said “Get me the 1000 best novels ever!”, would you really send so much Saul Bellow, or BE Ellis’ “Glamorama”? If you’re going to include so much Iain Banks, why not “the culture” as a series instead of his good, but in my opinion, not great, modern fiction. And so on…
May 27th, 2008 at 7:11 am
NO? Are you F-ing crazy? Of course a screenwriter needs to be well read. Do you damned homework, for Christ’s sake. You don’t need to read everything ever written, but make a god damned effort. And study classic films. Study and worship them but keep them in their place. Would you start a literary career by not knowing what the hell has happened before you? The same goes for film
One can sit in a Starbucks, unwashed, unshaven, pretending to absorb the atmosphere and insipid talk around one, for use in the masterpiece one is typing away on a laptop while waiting for a barista to call out one’s name, or you can get your ass home and read something that will open your mind to knew ideas that will eventually shed different angles of light onto the crap you write, thus improving your scope.
Not be well-read? It’s no wonder our children are 20% stupider these days.
May 28th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
99.
And I agree with your larger point. You don’t have to be well-read to be a writer, great or not.
Though I do think the more you read the more you realize that following so-called writing/story rules do not make a piece of something worth reading. After all, it’s impossible to insist that MIDNIGHT’S CHILDREN has a three act build with a straight face - though I’m sure some will try.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:16 pm
After all, this blog is about screenwriting, not about novels, so I believe the list in question should rather be: “1001 films you have to watch if you want to be a screenwriter”. And that brings me to a question for John: What would you put on that list?
June 27th, 2008 at 8:12 am
I’m a playwright, so much of my reading wouldn’t have been included. However, I am also a former student of literature, and I still only came to 142 of those books. And I do have to say that many of the books on that list I started and never finished because, frankly, I didn’t think they were all that great.
So, ultimately, I agree with everyone who has said that one should be the arbiter of what one “has” to read before one dies.